"[He] has gone far beyond what the U.S. bishops and representatives of the Holy See have said..."
3/21/2003 10:00:54 AM
Mark Brumley, president of Ignatius Press and Campion College, remarks on the lenten pastoral letter of Bishop John Michael Botean, Eparch of the Romanian Catholic Eparchy of Saint George in Canton, OH, which stated that participation in U.S. military action against Iraq a "mortal sin":
The bishop seems to think that no reasonable, faithful Catholic could judge differently. But a bishop's teaching ministry of stating principles of Catholic teaching is one thing; trying to bind the consciences of Catholics to accept particular political positions in complex situations is another. Bishops usually avoid proposing their prudential judgments about complex political issues in ways that seek to bind consciences because faithful, reasonable Catholics, affirming Catholic principles, do or can differ on the assessment of the facts that affect how those principles should be applied.
For example, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops frequently takes highly specific public policy stances, but the bishops do not generally claim that Catholics are obliged to agree with their political positions or teach that failure to do so amounts to mortal sin. In the case of war with Iraq, the USCCB has opposed the war and has challenged Catholics and others to assess its dangers. It has not declared that participation in the war is mortal sin.
Of course sometimes a particular circumstance is so manifestly a case of an obligatory action or an illicit action that no reasonable disagreement about the prudential course of action is possible for people holding to the same Catholic principles. Abortion, for example, is a grave injustice to the rights of unborn human beings. There is no just way deliberately and intentionally to take the life of an innocent, unborn child and no just way to reconcile support for laws that authorize such an action. Likewise, there is no just way one can indiscriminately kill non-combatants and therefore no room for differences of opinion among faithful Catholics about the prudence of doing so.
Apparently, Bishop Botean thinks that war with Iraq is a similar situation. He seems to regard the circumstances that others--Catholic and non-Catholic--point to as justifying war with Iraq as so manifestly incompatible with Catholic just war teaching that no prudent person could reasonably judge otherwise, based on Catholic principles. In taking that stand, Bishop Botean has gone far beyond what the U.S. bishops and representatives of the Holy See have said, both groups of which have opposed war with Iraq. In effect, he claims that the facts are so obviously contrary to how many faithful, informed Catholics and others see them that traditional Catholic teaching about the right and duty of civil authority to make the determination of whether war is justified can be set aside (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2309) and that he, as bishop, can bind his people to follow his personal assessment of the geopolitical situation.
What is worse, Bishop Botean presents no arguments or evidence that Catholic just war teaching is not applicable to U.S. led attack on Iraq; he simply declares that it is not and expects those for whom he exercises pastoral responsibility to comply, as if no supporting assessment of the facts is necessary or contrary assessment possible.
Bishop Botean's extreme action seems to go well beyond a reasonable exercise of his office. For a canon lawyer's careful analysis of Bishop Botean's letter, check out Edward Peter's blog.
